92 réponses à ce sujet

[DWareFan]

Harshly put OP, but I agree with the sentiment. For one, I think BioWare makes its' protagonists too big and too powerful. If each game had been smaller scale, no one would be asking why the PC who became the head of a crime syndicate in Antiva during the last game isn't coming back to start a slave revolt in Tevinter. Setting each game 100 years or more apart would fix this as well. No matter how powerful the hero was, they're dead now and BioWare doesn't have to force an epilogue for their entire life and death on them. The player can headcanon it. The sequel baiting is also pretty crazy, especially when it ends up going nowhere like with the OGB and the mage/templar war. If they do the same thing with Solas, the elves, the veil, and the Inquisitor's personal vendetta, I'm going to be upset. Don't set things up only to toss them out. Having plotlines and companions that continue from game to game isn't satisfying when you change protagonists halfway through.

 

Which is exactly why they should have closed the Solas plot with a DLC.

[SomberXIII]

I can't imagine living with the kind of mentality the OP does have. It's too sad and pitiable.

[robertthebard]

Yes, clearly, when people disagree with you they just "don't understand you" and x and y is fact because you said so.
 
Are you really going to use angry rebelling pubescent teen logic to try and prove your point?

Did you read the OP? How can an argument extend past that if that's where it started? I didn't even read their last post, but let me take a stab at what it said:

You guys are full of ****, every game that I've ever played, that I say so, meets my criteria, which is subject to change based on whether or not I can make a naked character.

Pretty close to an accurate summation?

[LOLandStuff]

Did you read the OP? How can an argument extend past that if that's where it started? I didn't even read their last post, but let me take a stab at what it said:

You guys are full of ****, every game that I've ever played, that I say so, meets my criteria, which is subject to change based on whether or not I can make a naked character.

Pretty close to an accurate summation?

 

You forgot godlike NWN2. Mention it a few times and you're spot on.

[Pee Jae]

Well, that was more than just the tip, it was the whole .... where am I?

[Redemption2407]

Yes, clearly, when people disagree with you they just "don't understand you" and x and y is fact because you said so.

 

Are you really going to use angry rebelling pubescent teen logic to try and prove your point?

Nope, the part I refered to as facts are indeed facts I doubt anyone here disagrees with me, and I mean ANYONE, it doesn't mean it is good or bad, this of course will change from person to person but the said facts are facts as follows:
1 - Lack of stat distribution. Why it is relevant for me? Because for me the character is only his stats and nothing else, as said in many previous posts I don't believe in will, individuality, personality or choice thus my character is defined solely by his character sheet and not his action making stat points extremely relevant to my characters.
2 - Lack of non combat skills. Why it is relevant for me? Same reasons above, I don't believe in choice or will so my character is what the character sheet says this means chosing a line in a dialogue do not represent my character, because I don't believe in choice (in fact I know for sure it is impossible for such a thing exist) so answering someone means nothing but having a skill like persuasion or intimidation means a lot, means my character was conditioned to give that response.
3 - From NWN2 onwards we have a descreasing number of races and classes, specially classes. In D&D we had lots of classes and prestige classes which we could compare to specializations, plus we could have multiclass with up to 4 classes including prestige ones. Races too with very relevant features making a huge diference for characters builds.

These things above are FACTS, you can compare if the features is present of not and you can compare the number of races and classes so unless you have a very weird definition of fact, those are facts.

Which is not fact is how you deal with it, if it is problematic for you to represent your character or not. For me it is the diference between being able to play a game or not. In NWN2 you can be a crafter sorcerer, a rogue wizard, a warrior warlock, a cleric monk or even something completely exotic, and it is mathematically a fact that we have more option, just pick the number of classes and make combinations of 4 (I guess you can only have 3 base classes the other one ust be prestige). Plus multiply for the extra classes and you have how much more options to represent the character you have.

Dialogue wise too, you have more options, as with any game where you don't have voiced protagonist and it is specially more open to evil choices. This however is not very objective and easy to calculate since "option" and "evil" are highly subjective and people may find more important the result of your actions than the options in dialogues so... let's just not go there... however it is pretty obvious that DAI don't even come close to allowing us to state that we are evil and that we side with darkness, also you can actually kill good people in NWN2.

Of course I talk about NWN2 because it is the godlike game but there are many many others with many options like Wizardry series or instance, I love their character creation. Or Wasteland 2 and Shadowrun as I said in previous posts.

But the thing is you people like story, obviously because you believe in choices, feelings, individuality and other things that allow you to connect to the story and other stuff like that. Since I know choice and individuality are illusions we use to create a, somehow, coherent meaning for life these things are useless, I can't represent my character through actions not in combat nor out of combat. My character is but my stats and skills (and the godlike feats of godlike D&D), my character don't actually have a story, they have behaviors acquired through experience that represent them. And in this Bioware games became more and more lacking, and unless you can show me how the 3 classes of DA are more than the dozens of NWN2 (and other games), or how not distributing stat points means more freedom to represent the character I'm going with what I said: It is a fact that they reduced the options for us. A mathematical fact.

Less option means less people can represent the character. You want a bard? You can't anymore. A cleric, nope. A druid? Nah. An arcane trickster, don't even dream. But please, perhaps I'm wrong and you can do all this you could in the past, please show me how. Where in my character sheet in DAI I can specify my character is a dancer? Can my rogue use magic, lore wise? Can I be a cleric of an elvhen god and have powers from my faith? Nope because as I said game SEVERLY butchered options. And since you failed so hard to understand, let me state it again: It is a mathematical fact. There are less races, less classes, less skills (we don't even have skills anymore, only combat skills).

So yeah, game works wonders if you want a mage, a rogue or a warrior. If you want anything else you can't. Also you can't multiclass... so please, please, please, tell me how this is not less options. Explain me how less is not less. I have a hard time understanding how 3 is not less than dozens.

[Redemption2407]

I know the solution to your problem: The Sims. With mods!

You are indeed 100% right. I have lots of funs with the Sims 3, I have wonderful stiletto heels sandals and I am grandmaster fighting in China. BUT the game have one failure, we don't have stat point distribution... but it is probably the the best. I wish I could kick in the Sims 4 too... I found wonderful heels.
Also Sims 3 have dungeons and treasures it is 3 billions times better than any Bioware RPG, by far.

[Saucy_Jack]

You are indeed 100% right. I have lots of funs with the Sims 3, I have wonderful stiletto heels sandals and I am grandmaster fighting in China. BUT the game have one failure, we don't have stat point distribution... but it is probably the the best. I wish I could kick in the Sims 4 too... I found wonderful heels.
Also Sims 3 have dungeons and treasures it is 3 billions times better than any Bioware RPG, by far.

 

Why are you posting on a second account? One not enough? 

[LOLandStuff]

Why are you posting on a second account? One not enough? 

 

Thinks we didn't figure it out, and that they have some supporters.

[Iakus]

 
One last thing, you used to do it right in the past, what the hell did you drink? I played NWN then I played NWN2 (Obsidian) and I had no expectation or any curiosity about my previous character. I had a good time with Aribeth and that's it. Now you make everything so that the players want the character to return but you wont let it or do it completely wrong as with Hawke. So either re-learn to write endings and give closure or let the PCs stay for 8 billion games or more.

Nope.  I have no desire to see any of my old characters again.  If I want to play as the Warden, or Hawke, or the Inquisitor, or heck the Bhaalspawn or Revan, I play those games again.  I don't look forward to future games about them.  I look forward to playing as different characters in future games.

 

Edit:  Okay, I do admit I am looking forward to Siege of Dragonspear.  But that's an expansion to BG1, not a new game.

[Toasted Llama]

*cracks fingers* Nothing beats angry rebelling pubescent teen logic better than... an angry, rebelling pubescent young-adult.

 

1 - Lack of stat distribution. Why it is relevant for me? Because for me the character is only his stats and nothing else, as said in many previous posts I don't believe in will, individuality, personality or choice thus my character is defined solely by his character sheet and not his action making stat points extremely relevant to my characters.

 

So I guess being able to distribute stats via means of crafting isn't good enough for you? I mean, you're still distributing stats by using materials that give the stuff that you want your character to have. Like... the literal meaning of stat distribution is still there.

 

But something something "it's not how this one game I used to like does it" something something, I guess.

 

 

2 - Lack of non combat skills. Why it is relevant for me? Same reasons above, I don't believe in choice or will so my character is what the character sheet says this means chosing a line in a dialogue do not represent my character, because I don't believe in choice (in fact I know for sure it is impossible for such a thing exist) so answering someone means nothing but having a skill like persuasion or intimidation means a lot, means my character was conditioned to give that response.

3 - From NWN2 onwards we have a descreasing number of races and classes, specially classes. In D&D we had lots of classes and prestige classes which we could compare to specializations, plus we could have multiclass with up to 4 classes including prestige ones. Races too with very relevant features making a huge diference for characters builds.

 

HURRAY! 2 factual points that you proceed to abuse to spew all sorts of vitriol and hate.

 

That's all the factual points you have. That's it. The rest of it is all subjective bullshit, vitriol or hate.

 

And it's ALOT.

 

"End means it either have a good retirement end or they die"

Both of your Warden and Hawke can die, you can give them this end if you want them to. They gave you that choice and you decided not to. So that's on you, not on Bioware.

 

"Do not make it so that we want to see more and more of the character, you can, I believe you. Square been doing one game characters for decades, why can't you?"

Because Bioware doesn't want to? Ever thought of that?

 

"how many heroes a place can have in 100 years anyway? What the hell?"

You'd be surprised how many people are considered heroes in a 100 year time-span. Also, so far all of the protagonists have only been heroes for local areas. The Warden is only a hero in Ferelden (hence the name Hero of Ferelden), Hawke is the Champion of... a city.... a city. And the Inquisitor is the hero of Southern Thedas.

 

"I suggest reading the dictionary and understanding the meaning of end, ending, closure and other words you do not seem to have understanding of their meaning."

Dragon Age Origins (Blight stopped) had an ending, Dragon Age 2 (Kirkwall **** dealt with) had an ending and Dragon Age Inquisition (Breach closed + person responsible for breach dead) had an ending. Just because the world (as any realistic world would) moves on after the ending events of said game, does not mean there was no ending.

 

"and giving how you suck at endings"

Entirely non-factual/subjective.

 

"you used to do it right in the past"

Just because they used to do things differently does not mean they used to do things right/correctly.

 

"Now you make everything so that the players want the character to return"

I don't and I know plenty of people who don't.

 

"do it completely wrong as with Hawke."

Non-factual/subjective.

 

"who can bear Bioware hideous stories, for sure."

Non-factual/subjective.

 

"But when you absolutely hate everything they write your character being alive and not controlled by you means necessarily that they are going to destroy them."

But whose problem is that?

 

"if I did not completely hate every single word Bioware writters ever written in their lives since their first game I would be "on your team". But I do hate 100% of the things they ever thought since they were born, my joy is what I headcanon about my characters, which obviously never fit their boring world and I can only achieve with mods, but if my character is alive she is going to be completely destroyed in the next game."

At this point I wonder why you even play the games.

 

"With mods I finally made a character I can relate to"

*reads description of character* ... *snort* yeah no wonder you relate to that.

 

"keep her from being the abomination Bioware tries to make her"

I don't think it's Bioware who turns her into an abomination.

 

"Lack of freedom sucks."

Except when a character's freedom is restricted and bound to numbers and stats, I guess? ("I don't believe in choice or will so my character is what the character sheet says")

 

"so we have to go through great lengths to barely make an interesting character"

Not we, darling. You.

 

"being the boring hero Bioware forces us to be"

Entirely non-factual/subjective.

 

"the character is going to be the awful disgusting depressive hero bioware wants us to be."

Do you really expect people to try and understand/take you seriously when you spew out this sort of crap?

 

"We will be righteous, strong, decided, and all other things that completely destroy a character."

Entirely non-factual/subjective.

 

"Shepard is the perfect exemple of everything a human being should not be. (S)he is a leader, inspires people, is strong, able to befriend and lead from the perfect ****** to the holy assassin, even the mad scientist, anyone, and lead human kind to victory."

I did not know committing genocide inspires people, getting half if not your entire crew killed is good leadership, shooting people in the back is befriending them and having the reapers succeed and kill every sentient species in the galaxy means "victory".

Did... did you ever... at one point in your entire playthrough of mass effect realize that "renegade" (or "space *******") was a thing? No? Maybe Renegon? Paragade? No....?

 

"I would rather be an elven slave being tortured from the cradle to the grave than being this sick retarded fantasy of bioware writters."

I'd rather play Renegade Shepard. You've probably never heard of it. It's a feature in this massive game made by this really obscure company called Bioware.

 

"I have nothing against people who like this"

Of course you don't! You just called what they like disgusting, depressive, boring, hideous, that it sucks, that you'd rather play "an elven slave being tortured from the cradle to the grave", that Paragon Shepard is a sick retarded fantasy....

 

"my only problem is that if you don't you are 100% f*cked, there is no escape,"

OR you could buy a different game that, you know, you DO like to play?

 

"she is the boring Bioware character now, a disgusting anti-blood magic righteous person."

Can't imagine why people could think you hate them.

 

"are action sh*t like Skyrim" "If I was playing Inquisition all this time... well I don't think human body can take that much vomiting."

Noooo idea.

 

"The first battle in DAI, the first time I played, already made me vomit all my internal organs, my soul and some other thing from another dimension that came through my throat so strong was the repulsive disgusting force of seeing action in the game."

Nope. Really no clue.

 

"I understand normal people think "origin" means anything"

Starting to think you're a droid, the way you mention "normal people".

 

"So I'm pretty sure D&D creator/devs are retarded enough to like action,"

Yeah, ugh, so retarded. Pfffsh, who the hell likes "creative works characterized by emphasis on exciting action sequences" anyway? Boring numbers, menus and (slow as hell) turn-based combat all the way!

 

SIGNATURE BONUS ROUND!

"RPG = Assigning stat points at character creation and level up, having non combat skills, and dialogue options depending on character stats and skills, combat is turn based and there is no jumping"

Wrong. A roleplaying game is a game wherein a player assumes the role of a character in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development.

 

Or to be short: a person plays a role in a game.

 

That's it. That's all that's needed for it to be a roleplaying game.

 

"Action, any kind of action, means it is an action game, there is no such a thing as action RPG, there are action games with stories pretending to be RPG and failing miserably"

Wrong. Plain and simple, wrong. If it were true then LARPing wouldn't be RPing either. Except it definitely is RPing.

 

"Exploration ruins DA, I couldn't care less for a world as boring as Thedas"

Correction: "Exploration ruined DA for me,"

 

"The only story that matters in a RPG is the one I build for my character and not the one the developers force down my throat"

Your story is gets shaped by the world/lore it lives in (and in the case of a game, one that is shaped by the devs), that's what RPing is all about.

 

"DAI is the worst game in all gaming history, 0% RPG, 100% action, only Bioware can make it worse, and will, DA4 is going to be the worst action sh*t ever"

This is so wrong and non-factual I'm just gonna snort and giggle.

[MrMrPendragon]

I would've just gone with "No RNG". Seriously, I've been farming the hell out of that Superior Prowler Armor for like an hour now.

[Nefla]

Which is exactly why they should have closed the Solas plot with a DLC.

Or just not made it into a thing.

[Donk]

Why are you posting on a second account? One not enough? 

 

The Banhammer has struck. There are a couple of these floating around. 

[Aren]

How do you keep players from asking for the Warden, Hawke and now the Inquisitor back?

Kill them all?

[Aren]

I dunno. DA:O's trailer is pretty mediocre, 

It is for Leliana isn't it?

False advertising she is completly different in the game.

[Aren]

Harshly put OP, but I agree with the sentiment. For one, I think BioWare makes its' protagonists too big and too powerful. If each game had been smaller scale, no one would be asking why the PC who became the head of a crime syndicate in Antiva during the last game isn't coming back to start a slave revolt in Tevinter. Setting each game 100 years or more apart would fix this as well. No matter how powerful the hero was, they're dead now and BioWare doesn't have to force an epilogue for their entire life and death on them. The player can headcanon it. The sequel baiting is also pretty crazy, especially when it ends up going nowhere like with the OGB and the mage/templar war. If they do the same thing with Solas, the elves, the veil, and the Inquisitor's personal vendetta, I'm going to be upset. Don't set things up only to toss them out. Having plotlines and companions that continue from game to game isn't satisfying when you change protagonists halfway through.

 Bioware primarily cares about a small circle of NPC supermages. "This franchise is about Thedas, not the player character" is a convenient smokescreen for that.

This strong impression that it's not really supposed to be my story is the prime reason that so totally tanked Inquisition's endgame for me.

It's the polar opposite of the amazing In Your Heart Shall Burn.

If ex companions continue to be involved,why he protagonist should remain of screen?

[Il Divo]

But the thing is you people like story, obviously because you believe in choices, feelings, individuality and other things that allow you to connect to the story and other stuff like that.

 

 

 

Since I know choice and individuality are illusions we use to create a, somehow, coherent meaning for life these things are useless,

 

 

These two things don't agree with each other.

[Il Divo]

One last thing, you used to do it right in the past, what the hell did you drink? I played NWN then I played NWN2 (Obsidian) and I had no expectation or any curiosity about my previous character. I had a good time with Aribeth and that's it. Now you make everything so that the players want the character to return but you wont let it or do it completely wrong as with Hawke. So either re-learn to write endings and give closure or let the PCs stay for 8 billion games or more.

 

Assuming we're talking about the original Neverwinter Nights campaign, I'm not surprised that you had no expectation or curiosity about your  previous character. I'd argue the campaign was one of Bioware's worst, surpassed only by the original Baldur's Gate.
 

[robertthebard]

Assuming we're talking about the original Neverwinter Nights campaign, I'm not surprised that you had no expectation or curiosity about your  previous character. I'd argue the campaign was one of Bioware's worst, surpassed only by the original Baldur's Gate.

While the NWN campaign was sort of meh, the whole purpose to NWN was the toolset. That was outstanding, for it's time. It added years to the life of that game, and there are still servers up, if you can get the addresses for them. Gamespy doesn't host any more, but they found ways around that to get their servers out there.

Regarding BG, the existence of BGEE sort of shoots that theory in the foot. A lot of people were interested in that, and got it, including me. BG was the game that "broke" me for games like Doom and Quake, both of which were freeware back then. I got that and never looked back. I had something like 117 complete playthroughs of BG, trying different classes, parties, alignments etc. Tons of replayability there, and when BGEE came out, I got it, despite having several boxed copies floating around here.

[EmperorSahlertz]

We don't need an end to any of these characters' story. We just need an update to their story, that goes beyond a word.doc file...

[Iakus]

 
Regarding BG, the existence of BGEE sort of shoots that theory in the foot. A lot of people were interested in that, and got it, including me. BG was the game that "broke" me for games like Doom and Quake, both of which were freeware back then. I got that and never looked back. I had something like 117 complete playthroughs of BG, trying different classes, parties, alignments etc. Tons of replayability there, and when BGEE came out, I got it, despite having several boxed copies floating around here.

Baldur's Gate was great, especially for its time (it was my first exposure to RPGs where your companions may have goals and agendas that don't line up with our own)  But I'm afraid it's a pale shadow compared to BG2.  What really makes the original great are the loads and loads of mods out there.  Including the NPC Project, which adds far more depth and backstory to both the story the followers.  

[Il Divo]

While the NWN campaign was sort of meh, the whole purpose to NWN was the toolset. That was outstanding, for it's time. It added years to the life of that game, and there are still servers up, if you can get the addresses for them. Gamespy doesn't host any more, but they found ways around that to get their servers out there.

Regarding BG, the existence of BGEE sort of shoots that theory in the foot. A lot of people were interested in that, and got it, including me. BG was the game that "broke" me for games like Doom and Quake, both of which were freeware back then. I got that and never looked back. I had something like 117 complete playthroughs of BG, trying different classes, parties, alignments etc. Tons of replayability there, and when BGEE came out, I got it, despite having several boxed copies floating around here.

 

Just to be clear, I think the NwN toolset was fantastic. Unfortunately, I didn't get to spend too much time with it, but just from watching other friends play online, it was a much closer simulation tabletop than most/all games could hope to get to.

 

The existence of BGEE I think also demonstrates the general utility of re-releases. It's a more extreme version of how critics often lament that everything in Hollywood  is a sequel/reboot/brand name. Aside from a character kit additions, 3 new characters, and some retooled mechanics (we can carry more arrows at a time now) for $20, that's not too bad from a marketing stand-point. But I personally don't think that Baldur's Gate, exactly as is, would have stood a shot if it was released for the first time now in 2015, especially compared to something like Pillars of Eternity, which is a much more modern rendition of the top down games, but with other innovations thrown in. Even now with the new expansion coming out, I think that largely builds off BG's hype from the 90's.

 

At least as someone who played BG after every other Bioware game released (this was after ME2's release), the amount of hype over the game essentially ruined it for me. For someone who is a huge fan of vancian casting/old school DnD 2.0 mechanics/dungeon crawls, I could see how/why it could be a blast. As someone interested in narrative, dialogue, and character interactions, playing BG for the first time felt more like a tour of RPG history: I saw why it was so critical at the time, but thought it shows its age pretty badly. In that sense, Planescape: Torment was much closer to what I'd look for in an RPG, since even if I disliked the combat, it had an insanely detailed dialogue system to compensate.

[robertthebard]

Just to be clear, I think the NwN toolset was fantastic. Unfortunately, I didn't get to spend too much time with it, but just from watching other friends play online, it was a much closer simulation tabletop than most/all games could hope to get to.
 
The existence of BGEE I think also demonstrates the general utility of re-releases. It's a more extreme version of how critics often lament that everything in Hollywood  is a sequel/reboot/brand name. Aside from a character kit additions, 3 new characters, and some retooled mechanics (we can carry more arrows at a time now) for $20, that's not too bad from a marketing stand-point. But I personally don't think that Baldur's Gate, exactly as is, would have stood a shot if it was released for the first time now in 2015, especially compared to something like Pillars of Eternity, which is a much more modern rendition of the top down games, but with other innovations thrown in. Even now with the new expansion coming out, I think that largely builds off BG's hype from the 90's.
 
At least as someone who played BG after every other Bioware game released (this was after ME2's release), the amount of hype over the game essentially ruined it for me. For someone who is a huge fan of vancian casting/old school DnD 2.0 mechanics/dungeon crawls, I could see how/why it could be a blast. As someone interested in narrative, dialogue, and character interactions, playing BG for the first time felt more like a tour of RPG history: I saw why it was so critical at the time, but thought it shows its age pretty badly. In that sense, Planescape: Torment was much closer to what I'd look for in an RPG, since even if I disliked the combat, it had an insanely detailed dialogue system to compensate.

Initially, it is more of a "You had to be there" kind of thing with BG. When it came out, it was on a pedestal amongst what was out there at the time. I would think, however, that if it were going to be released as a new product now, it would at least be more modern version. Of course, I'm not sure what anyone would be building based on now. That is not to say that modern CRPGs are "clones". Nothing of the sort, but w/out it, other classics of the day wouldn't have been made/released, such as BG 2, obviously, IWD series and Planescape, because I don't think anyone would have thought there was a market for it. BG proved that there was in fact a market, and BOOM, CRPGs are born. As I said, I was all over Doom and Quake at the time, and it shifted my priorities, gaming wise, to CRPGs. I haven't by any stretch played them all, but I do have a pretty nice collection of games that I load up now and wonder "How did I play through these graphics", for example.

I didn't play ME until the internet blew up with ME 3's ending. After a few months of seeing positive reviews for it marked as spam on Amazon, I decided to see what the fuss was about, and started at the beginning, buying one game at a time, to see if I was even going to be able to play it, because my initial take when it was new was "Shooter", and as a rule, I don't do them any more, and I haven't since Doom and Quake were freeware. Once I did, I could see the appeal to the series beyond mechanics, and I have played all three, obviously. W/out that initial impetus of BG, however, I doubt I would have ever heard of BioWare. I was, however, all over the toolset for NWN. I wrote story, designed areas and did some "light" scripting for two online modules, I even got some original music in one. I played the OC to unlock the modules in the toolset, but it wasn't the draw. It wasn't what kept me in it for 5 years, the toolset was, and it was a great ride.

[Ariella]

Nope, the part I refered to as facts are indeed facts I doubt anyone here disagrees with me, and I mean ANYONE, it doesn't mean it is good or bad, this of course will change from person to person but the said facts are facts as follows:
1 - Lack of stat distribution. Why it is relevant for me? Because for me the character is only his stats and nothing else, as said in many previous posts I don't believe in will, individuality, personality or choice thus my character is defined solely by his character sheet and not his action making stat points extremely relevant to my characters.

Allow me to introduce you to one of the granddaddies of crpgs: the goldbox series by SSI. Old school first edition gaming at its finest. You know what? No stat distribution. Only way you can stat up is by in game play, items that give you a point in a specific stat, or equipment that enhances stats (gauntlets of ogre power). Didn't get to add points to stats until 3E, which is when AD&D wet down hill in my opinion.

2 - Lack of non combat skills. Why it is relevant for me? Same reasons above, I don't believe in choice or will so my character is what the character sheet says this means chosing a line in a dialogue do not represent my character, because I don't believe in choice (in fact I know for sure it is impossible for such a thing exist) so answering someone means nothing but having a skill like persuasion or intimidation means a lot, means my character was conditioned to give that response.

This makes no freaking sense. In DAO, you had to pick a line, one might be persuade but you had to PICK it. And again, I refer you to the true old school games: did not have non combat skills.

3 - From NWN2 onwards we have a descreasing number of races and classes, specially classes. In D&D we had lots of classes and prestige classes which we could compare to specializations, plus we could have multiclass with up to 4 classes including prestige ones. Races too with very relevant features making a huge diference for characters builds.

This is not D&D, this is Dragon Age. If you want to play D&D, please feel free to play NWN2 or go play Neverwinter. But you do realize old school D&D only had four races, and even less in the way of classes.

https://en.wikipedia..._Dragons_(1974)

These things above are FACTS, you can compare if the features is present of not and you can compare the number of races and classes so unless you have a very weird definition of fact, those are facts.

Nope, it's preference. The warning was on the box from the beginning: this is NOT Dungeons and Dragons. This is Dragon Age. Different world, different story, different way of doing things. It's not trying to be a D&D clone.

And if I may point out DAI actually has more races than DAO with the Qunari.

Which is not fact is how you deal with it, if it is problematic for you to represent your character or not. For me it is the diference between being able to play a game or not. In NWN2 you can be a crafter sorcerer, a rogue wizard, a warrior warlock, a cleric monk or even something completely exotic, and it is mathematically a fact that we have more option, just pick the number of classes and make combinations of 4 (I guess you can only have 3 base classes the other one ust be prestige). Plus multiply for the extra classes and you have how much more options to represent the character you have.

Again, this is not NWN2 and has never been. There was never a option in any DA game to do such a thing, so why you're still playing I have no freaking idea.

So yeah, game works wonders if you want a mage, a rogue or a warrior. If you want anything else you can't. Also you can't multiclass... so please, please, please, tell me how this is not less options. Explain me how less is not less. I have a hard time understanding how 3 is not less than dozens.

Because they're not NEEDED. All those extras are bells and whistles.

This is ROLE Play, not ROLL play.